need to add title here

Trapped in Unemployment, Treating Depression, Mozart of Chess

February 19, 2012 5:54 PM

Scott Pelly reports on a new jobs program that is helping the long term unemployed; Then, a Harvard scientist says the placebo effect, not a drug's active ingredient, is helping people with depression; Finally, go inside the mind of 21-year-old chess grandmaster Magnus Carlsen.

Add a Comment See all 13 Comments
by onthedelaware October 20, 2012 6:46 PM EDT
It is correct that a drug is not helpful if the physician is not actively involved in helping --listening. I have tried to explain how the depression started and how difficult it has become for two years. It is complicated. However, I know that I have no dignity, no confidence and the consequences are really difficult. The anti-depressant makes me very sick after I take it and does nothing at all to help. It is like being caught in a door that you cannot get through to life again. I am on Medicare and the doctor is nice but not interested. I can't afford a mental health professional.
Reply to this comment
by xiloilx June 23, 2012 4:48 AM EDT
Legalize Cannabis that's the only real anti-depressant. Seriously you can't get depressed if you're busy laughing and munching out. You'd have to be totally psychotic to not respond to an herbal remedy that even the constitution of the united states is written on.
Reply to this comment
by stopdiscrim March 14, 2012 1:53 AM EDT
This past Sunday, February 19, "60 Minutes" did a segment on how the long-term unemployed are being discriminated against. Great, that is certainly newsworthy and needs to be a part of our public discourse. However, the huge unmentioned elephant in the room was the role that age discrimination plays in discrimination against the unemployed. It should be noted that not one of the people shown in the segment seemed to be under 50 years old. For the life of me, I have a difficult time understanding why there is so much fear and reluctance to address the issue of age discrimination, especially discrimination in hiring older workers.

As was mentioned in the "60 Minutes" piece, laws against discrimination based on race, age, and gender already exist. And how effective are those laws, especially when it comes to enforcing them? The enforcement of the law against age discrimination is a joke. Almost everyone I speak to about the issue tells me that employment discrimination based on age is too hard to prove--that as long as an employer can offer up a plausible reason for not selecting an older job applicant--then age discrimination cannot be proved.

Nevertheless, real common-sense remedies for age discrimination exist, so how can an attitude that age discrimination is too hard to prove, be justified? Obviously, when there is discrimination, the perpetrators don't usually admit to it. So what can be done to uncover the truth when age discrimination is a factor in making employment decisions? First, there has to be consensus in our society that job applicants cannot be labeled as too qualified for any position. "Too qualified" is too often code for "too old." If an employer is truly concerned about securing a long-term commitment from a potential employee they have legal and ethical ways of addressing that concern--without resorting to this flimsy excuse. Any flimsy, patently non-sensible reason for not hiring a well-qualified candidate for a position should send up potential discrimination red flags.

But where is the proof that discrimination is being practiced? Again, the way to prove discrimination begins with the qualifications of the potential employee. Discrimination becomes even more apparent by looking at the demographics of the people that a company, or even a department within a company, is hiring. When the ages of hired employees do not roughly match the percentage of older workers in the local populace, that should be an automatic red flag that older workers are being discriminated against. Of course, other red flags are raised if all working age demographics are not proportionately represented.

The current law against age discrimination in employment is seldom enforced. However, once a zero-tolerance for discrimination is communicated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the EEOC) with a few high-profile enforcements in both large and small companies, age discrimination in employment will no longer be a prevalent injustice. With an aging work force facing a weak economy without an adequate safety net, it is only a matter of time before age discrimination becomes a hot button issue. We need to fix this problem now so we can reduce the suffering of many aging Americans. Discrimination is corrosive not only for its victims, it's also corrosive to us all. Let's not wait for an older Bouazizi type martyr to become our call to action.
Reply to this comment
by rmm2012 March 12, 2012 2:47 AM EDT
I graduated with a degree as a therapist (MFT). I have also suffered from periods of mild to moderate depression most of my adult life. I took the drugs several years ago, but got off them when I felt better--despite the warning from my doctor not to do that. I have since had some bouts of depression, but I realized that exercise actually worked better than the drugs for me, so I try to work out and eat right. I'm not perfectly happy all the time, but I think I'm okay with that. What is lacking in all the drug company ads is the reality that to a certain extent, if you are more of a pessimistic/negative person, this just may be the way you are. You may have periods where you feel low. It's part of life for some people. The drug companies would like you to think that if you take this pill, you'll be "skipping through the fields" as they said on this story. Meanwhile, you never really were that way--even when you were not depressed, but that's beside the point. I think this doctor is absolutely right about anti-depressants-- they are tremendously over-prescribed, and don't perform up to the hype. I don't feel this way about anti-anxiety meds or other psychiatric medications. But I think anti-depressants are really only effective or severely depressed people. A lot of therapists, and doctors feel this way, but they may be unwilling to admit this publicly. They are afraid not to prescribe anti-depressants, because they are afraid they may have mis-diagnosed a person who is really severely depressed as being only moderately depressed patient and not do enough to help. They are afraid their patients may commit suicide and then someone will say "Why didn't you prescribe an anti-depressant?".. I think a lot of them are more worried about malpractice than they are about whether the drugs are effective, so they will throw anything at the symptoms. and hope for the best. This is a situation that has been foisted on the doctors by the drug companies, who have pushed these drugs as being "tremendously effective". They are not. They help a minority of people who take them. They are better than nothing for the truly depressed, and really not much of a help to the mildly/moderately depressed.
Reply to this comment
by VERITAS777 March 9, 2012 5:26 PM EST
There is an elephant in the room. It's painted with a lurid Joker's face. It is gigantic and covered with neon dollar signs and pictures of the grim reaper depicting various types of death and disease stemming from the use of psychiatric drugs. There is one for suicide, homicide, one for mass murder, one for an epidemic of soldiers killing themselves and others, one for neuroleptic malignant syndrome, one for tardive dyskinisia...others for despair, anxiety, and hopelessness. There are banners hanging from its neck with the names of various pharmaceutical companies and their specialized billion dollar brain disabling poisons. It is surrounded by a crowd of cheering ignorant. There are flags—hundreds with the names and faces of researchers and psychiatrists and not a few pastors. Right down the middle of the elephant's head are the letters "FDA" and spilling from its rectum are the fetid wasted lives of hundreds of thousands!
Reply to this comment
by VERITAS777 March 9, 2012 5:25 PM EST
There is an elephant in the room. It's painted with a lurid Joker's face. It is gigantic and covered with neon dollar signs and pictures of the grim reaper depicting various types of death and disease stemming from the use of psychiatric drugs. There is one for suicide, homicide, one for mass murder, one for an epidemic of soldiers killing themselves and others, one for neuroleptic malignant syndrome, one for tardive dyskinisia...others for despair, anxiety, and hopelessness. There are banners hanging from its neck with the names of various pharmaceutical companies and their specialized billion dollar brain disabling poisons. It is surrounded by a crowd of cheering ignorant. There are flags—hundreds with the names and faces of researchers and psychiatrists and not a few pastors. Right down the middle of the elephant's head are the letters "FDA" and spilling from its rectum are the fetid wasted lives of hundreds of thousands!
Reply to this comment
by KittyMontoya March 2, 2012 10:58 PM EST
sorry that tv guide link doesn't really help much lol. i posted this under "reply" cuz it won't let me edit my post. so here is the correct link for the PBS "Need To Know" program on this same topic of longterm unemployed americans.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2204715911
Reply to this comment
by KittyMontoya March 2, 2012 10:23 PM EST
there are millions of ppl out there in the USA, including almost ALL of the politicians currently running for office, who have NO CLUE AT ALL how bad the economy really is, and who do not grasp the overwhelming struggles it is causing to families, children, your neighbor, your former co-worker, etc. the news keeps trying to cheer everyone up by announcing that "unemployment is dropping" and "the recession is over" but it is a complete lie, TOTAL ********. unemployment figures are INCORRECT and completely skewed. no one is taking into account the ppl who are NO LONGER receiving unemployment benefits but have yet to find a job. those ppl are simply invisible. that subject was addressed a couple weeks ago on 60 minutes and i almost cried at how amazing it was that SOMEONE out there was talking about it. it is also addressed tonight on a PBS program entitled "Need To Know"
http://www.tvguide.com/tvshows/need-to-know-2012/episode-25-season-2/help-wanted/304322
Reply to this comment
by mritter1965 March 1, 2012 10:30 PM EST
I really enjoyed the segment on the long term unemployed. Although I am not fifty yet, I am currently unemployed and have been for approximately three years. I am a college graduate and a military veteran with a decent work history and I also feel that I have been discriminated against getting employed. The segment game me some hope, but the reality of my situation is that although laws have been passed where companies can get tax breaks for hiring me, i.e., $4,500.00 for being long term unemployed and $4,500.00 - $9,000.00 for being a veteran, I am still unemployed after applying for more than 400 jobs in the last six months. Jobs ranging from a Bachelor's degree required to a dishwasher position. The economy seems to continue to get worse, the corporations seem to not be investing in America's future, the banks are dishonest and greedy, the Republicans only care about the rich and America is turning into a depression-like nation. If the economy continues to get worse, it will not surprize me if there are riots in the street and violence erupts like in Greece.
Reply to this comment
by marthad2u February 23, 2012 12:26 PM EST
Unemployment for over 50 is HUGE - Why? Because if Obama care goes into place and companies have to pay for the insurance for their employees, someone under 40 may cost them $250 a month vs. someone over 50 may cost them as much as $600 a month. Simple math yet no one is addressing it.
Also, why does everyone need to work for a company. Why can't the government start a training program on how to start your own business, do you taxes, complete government forms as needed. I have my own business, but my husband handled all of this for me. Now that he passed away, I have spent DAYS going from one agency to another trying to get basic reporting information and requirements so I don't end up with huge fines. The worst part is there is no one place I can go to for a class or help. The government keeps stating that most jobs are created by small business - why not use online training to reach the millions in need and take the fear of opening a business away. Everyone laid off should be given a laptop if they do not have one, be required to update their skills through online classes, and they should be required to take courses on opening their own business even if they do not want to. There should be exceptions where they can stay on unemployment for the first 6 - 9 months until the business gets up an running to encourage folks to explore this avenue. Even some seed money would be helpful - still there are so many business you can start with minimal funds. Simple things could change our unemployment rolls. PS. I am an online instructor: http://MarthaDudley.com - and I have trained folks to be technical Microsoft Certified engineers, Real Estate agents, and now Vacation Rental owners so I know the power of Online Training.

In closing - please address the LOST GENERATION not being hired because of HEALTH INSURANCE. Do one of your sessions where you blur HR reps and disguise their voices and see what they say - I think you will be surprised!!!
Reply to this comment
See all 13 Comments
Recent Segments

60MinutesOverTime

60 Minutes Overtime is a weekly web show that begins where the weekly television broadcast ends

  • 48 Hours iPad App

    Big changes for the 2012-2013 season! Watch the current week's episode for FREE up to a week after it airs or subscribe for access to all shows, classic episodes and more!